In this poll, for example, when asked if homosexuality should be accepted or discouraged by society, moderates and liberals agree that it is a way of life that should be accepted by society by 65- and 33-point margins respectively, compared to conservatives who believe it should be discouraged by 32 points. When asked if our security depends on building strong ties with other nations or on our own military strength, both liberals and moderates agree with multilateralism by double-digit margins, while conservatives disagree. On values and on issues, moderates — with one large exception — swing toward liberals.

The exception is that moderates remain far more skeptical about government — and government spending — than liberals do.

An extraordinary columns today from the NYT’s David Brooks, pronouncing that the GOp has moved well beyond intellectual bankruptcy:

This generation of political leaders is confronting a similar situation [to the 1933 economic crisis], and, so far, they have failed utterly and catastrophically to project any sense of authority, to give the world any reason to believe that this country is being governed. … And let us recognize above all the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.

The most likely scenario, as of 3 PM this afternoon: The stock market continues to drop. Some version of the bailout passes in the next week. The American economy staggers into a recession, but passes through the storm without 1930s-style suffering; the Republican Party is not so fortunate. Even though most Americans claim to oppose the bailout [update: not anymore], the House GOP’s obstructionism is widely viewed as having worsened the economic situation; the fact that these are contradictory positions does not faze an electorate that wraps all of the country’s current troubles up, ties them with a bow, and lays them at the feet of the Bush-led GOP. John McCain loses by a landslide in November. The Democratic Party regains years or even decades worth of ground among the white working class, consolidates the Hispanic vote, and locks up a large chunk of highly-educated voters who might otherwise lean conservative. The much–discussed liberal realignment happens. And a politician running on a Ron Paul-style economic platform does very, very well in the GOP primaries of 2012.

The United States Chamber of Commerce vowed to exert pressure, warning in a letter to members of Congress that it would keep track of who votes how. “Make no mistake,” the letter said. “When the aftermath of Congressional inaction becomes clear, Americans will not tolerate those who stood by and let the calamity happen.”

In the new poll, it is underlying political attitudes that appear to dominate, just as they do in ratings of Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), the Democratic vice presidential nominee. Eighty-five percent of Republicans view Palin favorably, and nearly nine in 10 approve of her selection as Sen. John McCain‘s running mate. Among Democrats, 24 percent view her favorably and 57 percent disapprove of her selection.

In the hockey analogy, Palin wouldn’t get within a thousand miles of an NHL All-Star Game because she’s not a scoring talent. She’s a role player, an emotion-rouser. Emotion messes with the chalkboard-drawn game plan and thus achieves a specific strategic objective. She can make game-changing agitation plays that rouse her home team and provoke the other side into counterattacks that –- 100% of the time -– end up punishing the team who hits back. Democrats would be smart to understand her as such, and I see a lot of reaction that doesn’t seem to grasp what Palin is doing and the value she’s providing. I see a lot of Democrats taking a lot of bait.

This applies more to Democratic surrogates than it does to the top-ticket duo. Joe Biden had the smart response yesterday –- naming the behavior -– expecting it, and then riding through without taking the bait. … And that’s all he says of Palin’s antics. Name the behavior, even praising the skill with which the agitation was attempted, and then back to focus. It’s “the economy, stupid.”

North Carolina’s two favorite blogging political heavyweights, Gary Pearce (aide to former Gov. Jim Hunt) and Carter Wrenn (aide to the late Sen. Jesse Helms) are not impressed by the Palin selection. Their reasoning differs slightly, but agrees on McCain’s weakness.

McCain panicked after the Democratic convention and Obama’s speech. He wanted to stop the momentum. He did. The wrong way. … Show me a party that worries about revving up the base at this point in the campaign, and I’ll show you a party that’s losing. It’s another iron law of politics.

McCain’s campaign got caught flat-footed, fumbled, and looked just plain silly … This constitutes a whole bunch of fumbles –- in five days –- by folks who were supposed to know better. Governor Palin has a lot going for her and right now she ought to give some thought to telling the political gurus she’d just as soon decide how to handle the next crisis herself.

When I look at the labeling now with parties, to me it all seems backwards. Republican presidents seem to be associated with huge deficits and more radical foreign policies, while Dem presidents seem to be associated with more frugality and more conservative national security policies.

I tend to make my pick largely on foreign policy, and the reason why I would take Obama over McCain is because I think Obama will be a more cautious, conservative national security leader than McCain, who I expect to be more bold and radical–much like Bush. I just don’t think America can afford four more years of that.

You might read the whole thing. He comes from a post-Boomer outlook that has little use for red/blue division or refighting the battles of 40 years ago.